Timeline for How many stereoisomers are possible for the compound in picture?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
28 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 21, 2016 at 12:18 | vote | accept | CommunityBot | ||
| Aug 21, 2016 at 11:41 | comment | added | user14857 | @IvanNeretin Hi.Can you answer this if possible?Its a similar question. chemistry.stackexchange.com/questions/57761/… | |
| Aug 19, 2016 at 17:32 | history | edited | user7951 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 45 characters in body
|
| Aug 19, 2016 at 17:15 | history | edited | Jan | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Improved typesetting, removed the bit about the edit.
|
| Aug 19, 2016 at 17:09 | vote | accept | CommunityBot | ||
| Aug 21, 2016 at 12:18 | |||||
| Aug 19, 2016 at 17:09 | vote | accept | CommunityBot | ||
| Aug 19, 2016 at 17:09 | |||||
| Aug 19, 2016 at 17:08 | answer | added | SteffX | timeline score: 2 | |
| Aug 19, 2016 at 17:08 | vote | accept | CommunityBot | ||
| Aug 19, 2016 at 17:09 | |||||
| Aug 19, 2016 at 17:06 | comment | added | Ivan Neretin | OK, then 64 it is. | |
| Aug 19, 2016 at 17:05 | answer | added | Jan | timeline score: 3 | |
| Aug 19, 2016 at 17:05 | comment | added | user14857 | So do you agree with $2^6$ @IvanNeretin i.e $2^5$ pairs of enantiomers?No mistakes in the formulation..right? | |
| Aug 19, 2016 at 17:04 | comment | added | SteffX | Sorry, it is 64 stereoisomers, aka $2^6$ (I am tired on Friday) | |
| Aug 19, 2016 at 17:03 | comment | added | user14857 | en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereoisomerism | |
| Aug 19, 2016 at 17:03 | comment | added | user14857 | @IvanNeretin But according to Wikipedia "Enantiomers, also known as optical isomers, are two stereoisomers that are related to each other by a reflection: They are mirror images of each other that are non-superimposable. Human hands are a macroscopic analog of stereoisomerism. Every stereogenic center in one has the opposite configuration in the other." SO ENANTIOMERS ARE ALSO STEREOISOMERS. | |
| Aug 19, 2016 at 17:01 | comment | added | Ivan Neretin | Half of those are enantiomers. Or rather, all those 64 are pairs of enantiomers. | |
| Aug 19, 2016 at 17:01 | comment | added | user14857 | @SteffX I'm getting something different.There are 6 stereogenic areas.So I just use 26...is that wrong? | |
| Aug 19, 2016 at 17:00 | comment | added | user14857 | I'm getting something different.There are 6 stereogenic areas.So I just use $2^6$...is that wrong? @IvanNeretin | |
| Aug 19, 2016 at 16:58 | comment | added | Ivan Neretin | @SteffX 36 sounds kinda superfluous. Are you sure you didn't mean 32? | |
| Aug 19, 2016 at 16:57 | comment | added | user14857 | @SteffX Can you explain your method in detail? | |
| Aug 19, 2016 at 16:54 | comment | added | SteffX | There are 4 chiral centers in the ring. The diene moiety (upper right) has 2 isomers and the lower right moiety also has 2 stereoisomers. So I counted 36 stereosiomers total. | |
| Aug 19, 2016 at 16:51 | comment | added | user14857 | I get your point @IvanNeretin...its really getting complicated.. | |
| Aug 19, 2016 at 16:49 | review | Close votes | |||
| Aug 19, 2016 at 19:17 | |||||
| Aug 19, 2016 at 16:46 | comment | added | Ivan Neretin | Good to know you understand that. (Also, drawing it the wrong way may earn you downvotes and close votes.) Now to the point. Your E,Z calculation is correct. As for the "up or down" thing, the right-hand groups may also be either way, so it gets more complicated. | |
| Aug 19, 2016 at 16:41 | comment | added | user14857 | @IvanNeretin I don't have a better picture... | |
| Aug 19, 2016 at 16:40 | history | edited | user14857 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 219 characters in body
|
| Aug 19, 2016 at 16:40 | comment | added | Ivan Neretin | Carbon with two double bonds is linear, not bent. | |
| Aug 19, 2016 at 16:39 | history | edited | user14857 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 219 characters in body
|
| Aug 19, 2016 at 16:18 | history | asked | user14857 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |